I'm on the Jetty side of the fence when it comes to the Tomcat debate
personally. Jetty has always been very fast and running "java -jar
start.jar" is so much more pleasant than I've experienced with
Tomcat. If someone wants to push Tomcat in so that it can be run in
a similarly fast and lightweight way then I'm +1 for sure. Quite
likely my experience with Tomcat is outdated and it could be done
much like Jetty.
Erik
On Apr 24, 2006, at 12:15 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
I'm OK with a downgrade... there wasn't any particular reason to go
with Jetty6 other than it was the latest-and-greatest.
There is still the tomcat vs jetty issue though:
http://www.nabble.com/tutorial-or-demo-download-t1121522.html#a2933223
It does seem like the first thing many people try to do is get Solr
running with Tomcat. Perhaps that's another reason for the example to
be Tomcat based?
-Yonik
On 4/24/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I had trouble returning a field from Solr (as detailed in a previous
e-mail) using the built-in Jetty. It worked fine with Tomcat, and I
just tried it with Jetty 5.1.11RC0 and it works as well. It seems
the Jetty version in Solr's repository is an "unstable" version that
has some type of response rendering bug (with use of NIO?) but that
the latest "stable" release works fine.
Are there reasons we need to have an unstable version of Jetty built
into the example app? Or would it be ok to switch to 5.1.11RC0?
